tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN February 5, 2014 12:00pm-2:01pm EST
formerly -- also, amendment and final passage votes on a bill encouraging hunting and fishing on federal lands. first votes expected in about an hour and a half from now. live coverage now of the u.s. house here on c-span. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]
the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered chaplain, guest springfield, missouri. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, you equip the founders with great resilience as they sought your wisdom in establishing our nation. with that same power that inspired our patriots, bless these members of congress today, lift them up, o god, when they feel discouraged, when negative thoughts seem to dominate, when the winds are against them, strengthen their minds and spirits with an inner faith that only you can provide. as we are now united in prayer, unite their efforts, help them leave bitterness by the wayside. may their decisions consider the hopeful faces of parents, children, elderly, soldiers,
veterans that each person in every district will be blessed by the strong leadership of this congress. as many voices compete for their attention, create a sanctuary for them to pause, reflect and hear your voice. equip them with the courage that constantly reminds them that with god all things are possible. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his pproval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the gentleman from south carolina. >> mr. speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not
present. the speaker: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentlelady from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen. ms. ros-lehtinen: please join us in the pledge to our nation's flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: without objection, the gentleman from missouri, mr. long, is recognized for one minute. mr. long: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today i have the honor of introducing my friend, reverend dr. andrew cheney. reverend cheney is a third generation minister. he serves as the senior minister at the historic first calvary presbyterian church in springfield, missouri, a place that is a special place to me and my family.
he is a spiritual voice to me and the springfield community. congress has a long-standing tradition of beginning each day with a prayer. i'm privileged and honored to have the opportunity today to welcome reverend dr. andrew cheney to the people's house as he opened today's session with a prayer. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair will nt taint up to 15 -- will entertain up to 15 further requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? ms. ros-lehtinen: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much, mr. speaker. my home state of florida has been an overly responsible and even generous partner in the national flood insurance program. in the last 20 years, floridians have paid four times in premiums than we have seen returned in claims. yet, fema is raising thousands
upon thousands of policy premiums to absurd levels, easily doubling, tripling, quadrupling them and in some cases far higher. these radical changes are counterintuitive and are forcing hardworking, diligent and responsible families from their homes. it is time to take a step back and rein in this agency and its harmful belief that this is a potential path forward. families in our communities need and deserve relief from these ridiculous high premiums. i will continue to work with my colleagues on trying to find a reasonable solution to this crisis, one that will address the immediate needs of local homeowners. thank you, mr. speaker, for the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. ellison: mr. speaker, trade, of course, can be good for americans and our economy,
but we cannot afford bad trade deals. bad trade deals exacerbate inequality and make the ladder of opportunity harder to climb for working people. 20 years ago, washington passed nafta, and the results have been devastating to our economy for working people. over 850,000 u.s. jobs left for mexico and our trade deficit skyrocketed from $100 billion to $700 billion. and before fast track authority, the u.s. had a trade surplus. fast track and the transpacific partnership are not right for the american people. we must have more transparency. we must have more disclosure and we must have good trade deals that reflect the fact that the united states workers produce great services and products and the trade deals need to reflect that, not have a race to the bottom and which we go to the cheapest markets around the world to compete with good american workers who
make fair pay. it's not the right thing. i'm for trade but not trade agreements that are conducted in secret. so i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. johnson: well, welcome to president obama's america where labor force participation rates are the lowest since 1978, where good-paying jobs are scarce, where many health insurance premiums are either skyrocketing or being canceled, where jobs bills sent to the senate collect dust on harry reid's desk, where the state department concluded the job-creating keystone x.l. pipeline poses little environmental risk yet the president has not approved it, where yesterday the nonpartisan congressional budget office released a report stating that obamacare will have substantially larger negative
effects on the economy than anticipated. the c.b.o. projects the number of full-time workers to fall by roughly 2.3 million while increasing financial burdens on our children and our grandchildren. i urge the president, use that pen to approve house-passed jobs bill. use that phone to work with congress and let's work together to relieve the burden that so many of your policies have placed on the backs of the american people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. higgins: madam speaker, today i will address the great lakes environmental summit. buffalo has easy access to lake erie that has drove our financial industry. our future is bright thanks to private investment in the waterfront. moreover, the great lakes supports 1.5 million jobs and
$62 billion in wages per year. a report by the brookings institution found that for every $1 invested in restoration generates $2 in economic benefit and up to $4 in economic activity through jobs, development and increased property values. but in order to realize these benefits we must protect from outside threats like nutrient runoff, invasive species and harmful algae blooms. i commend the work of advocates like the great lakes restoration initiative, the environmental protection agency, the buffalo-insiding a real estate keeper, citizens for the campaign environment and my colleagues on the congressional great lakes task force for taking action on protecting and preserving this vital natural resource. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio, the speaker of the house, seek recognition? the speaker: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. the speaker: madam speaker and my colleagues, too many middle-class americans are out of work or worried about losing
their job and the house has passed dozens of bills to help them. more are in the works as we speak, including important legislation that fosters more trade and opportunities for growth. in washington, it's often referred to as t.p.a., trade promotion authority. but around the country from our farms to our factories, this means jobs. it means making it easier for our workers, including the 1.4 million ohioans whose jobs depend on trade, to be able to compete with china and the world's growing economies. this initiative has support from members of both parties, including president obama himself. unfortunately, like many of our jobs bills, his party's leaders in the senate are standing in the way. the president needs to use his bully pulpit only as the president can and change their minds. he can cothat today when he address -- he can do that today when he addresses senate
democrats. i hope he will help us move this bill forward on behalf of the american workers. otherwise, all the talk about a year of action would appear just to be another broken promise. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? mr. cicilline: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: madam speaker, i rise today to applaud c.v.s.'s decision to stop selling cigarettes and tobacco products in more than the 4,600 stores in the united states. c.v.s. is promoting health and wellness and i hope other pharmacies will take their example. i would like to thank the and dent and the board their staffs who are committed to putting people over profits. as one of the largest retail and pharmacy chains, c.v.s. pharmacy has helped countless
rhode islanders and people across the country better manage their health. lung cancer, diabetes, emphysema and cigarette smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the united states. taking this product off their shelves will continue their long tradition of helping people improve their health and wellness and undermine big tobacco's active marketing to future generations of americans to persuade them to take up this deadly habit. i salute c.v.s. care market and help americans live longer and healthier lives and i'm so proud of their decision and their corporate leadership. i thank you, madam speaker, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, lots of kids in america go to a grade school. mr. messer: but too many kids don't and that's not ok. the simple truth is too many
families live in neighborhoods with bad schools. they can't afford to move and they can't afford tuition to go to a better school either. there is another way. imagine a system not limited by zip code where education dollars follow the child and every family in america can afford to send their child to the school of their choice. this dream could become reality under the scholarships for kids act. we filed the bill today. it gives states the option to use federal education funds for scholarships to lower income families. empowering these families to choose the best opportunities for their kids. let's stop defending the indefensible and start imagining a great future for every child in america. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i want to thank the house of representatives for passing my amendment yesterday which will help preserve access to the national forest system lands for snowmobiles in michigan and across the nation. mr. kildee: the same access that has long been granted for responsible snowmobilers. in michigan, snowmobiling has long been an important part of our state's heritage. half of my home state's 6,300 miles of snowmobile trails are on public land. each year, families in my district head into the woods to partake in this winter recreational activity. snowmobiling supports our economy, particularly in northern michigan. each year snowmobiling pumps over $200 million into my state's economy, supporting
thousands and thousands of jobs. nationally it's even greater. $26 billion in economic activity annually and over 100,000 jobs directly related to the snowmobile industry and the over 225,000 miles of groomed trails that people ride on. my amendment supports these jobs, promotes conservation and ensures snowmobilers that they will be able to continue to enjoy our incredible winters and while preserving the natural beauty of our national forests. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous cop sent to to the address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker, i come before you as someone who at times as a family did not
have health care. mr. mica: and i think we should do a better job of helping people get health care. some predicted on both sides of the aisle they said the way obamacare was crafted it could flult a train wreck. we didn't really know but now we do know. everyone has seen the rollout which was a disaster. every american should be stunned to see the congressional budget office report today. you should read that. 2.5 million people will lose their jobs, not -- that doesn't even consider the one who was been put to part-time status when they're trying to feed their families, make a living, put gas in the car. here we have more people losing jobs because of this. look at this, how many people will see a smaller amount in their paycheck, thanks to obamacare this isn't a partisan document. this is something that's put out that has analyzed the impact and it could be devastating. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady
from connecticut seek recognition? >> i skms ask unanimous consent to address the house for qun minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized msms delauro: he said, the notion that if you work hard and talk responsibility you can get ahead. i could not agree more with many of the president's proposals. increase minimum wage, increased education, support equal pay for equal work. all necessary to meet the serious nick challenges of our time, stagnant wages and a lack of upward mobility. but the president's push for fast track authority for the transpacific partnership trade agreement flies in the face of these reforms. 20 years after the nafta agreement, involving mexico and its $10 a day wangs we know that
the transpacific partnership which includes vietnam and its 28 cents per hour minimum wage will depress wages. it will lead to offshoring and the los of american jobs. raising american living standards, restoring the middle class, creating american jobs and increasing wages, those are our economic goals. that's what we should achieve as a society and the transpacific partnership fails on all of these goals and we should defeat fast track. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. last week i had the honor of air tending the cleveland-bradley county chamber of commerce meeting. mr. desjarlais: ms. margaret shank and mr. bob carver
received awards for their dedication to our community. i want to thank these individuals along with the chamber of commerce for their on gink fight to grow and support local business. american small business owners and entrepreneurs are doing their part in growing jobs and strengthening our economy. now times for washington to live up to its end of the bargain. we must eliminate the numerous regulatory roadblocks imposed upon businesses and holding them back from reaching their full potential. we know the path to prosperity will not be paved by washington bureaucrats, rather a brighter future will be secured by groups like the cleveland-bradley county chamber of commerce who seek this to the foster innovation and empower local businesses. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new hampshire seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute.
ms. kuster: today i rise in support of comprehensive immigration reform: our border remain vulnerable. employers game the system by hiring undocumented workers and millions of individuals are living in the shadows this status quo fails to meet the needs of businesses, is unfair to workers, and is holding back economic growth and opportunity in new hampshire and all across this country congress must prioritize the consideration of bipartisan legislation to comprehensively reform and mornedize our immigration system. h.r. 15, the border security economic opportunity and -- border security, economic opportunity, and immigration act. it has been over 200 day since the senate passed similar reform legislation and it's long pastime for the thourps do the same. republicans and democrats must work together to fake this common step to better secure our
country and to reward those who work hard and are strengthening our economy. comprehensive immigration reform would strengthen our borders, combat illegal immigration and create new opportunities for individual achievement and the pursuit of the american dream. mr. speaker, i implore you, bring this important bill to the floor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: for more than 1,960 days the president has refused to approve the construction of the keystone pipeline. he's incorrectly tpwhramed delay on harmful environmental impacts. but last week the state department released a study confirming what house republicans have been saying for years. the keystone pipeline will not harm the environment. the president is placing
politics over job creation. on monday, former energy secretary steven chu acknowledged the administration's decision is strictly political and has no scientific backing. the president says he want to -- wants to create jobs but his inconsistent actions have prevented over 120,000 immediate shovel-ready jobs. the president said these are temporary job bus he is wrong. these are permanent jobs. at m.t.u. of graniteville and other places producing tires for transportation. the most secure transportation is by pipeline and the president should join congress in developing keystone for jobs. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise to call on the house of representatives to take
action to prevent enormous flood insurance rate hikes from going into effect for homeowners across this country, this is about the basic principle of housing affordability. recently i met with real tors, homeowners, and insurance agents in my neck of the woods and they shared how dramatic the impact has been in our region. one prospective home buyer was shocked to find that their flood insurance quote came in to a whopping $13,000 per year. after paying $600 to show that the property was elevated the insurance quote was still more than the monthly mortgage payment would have been. and the deal fell through. this policy has already led to a rapid and sub stab rble decline in a part of my district that struggles with double digit unemployment and can't afford another round of congressional dysfunction. mr. kilmer: the senate has acted, let's do the same and take up the homeowner flood insurance affordability act. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does has the
gentleman from ohio seek -- does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, my hometown of dayton, ohio, is the birth place of aviation. at the turn of the semplingry, wilber and orville wright invented the first airplane, ushering in the aviation era. it revolutionized commerce, travel and our national defense. today ohio continues to help the nation reach new heights in aviation and aerospace industry. mr. turner: for example in dayton, the field where the wright brothers developed and flew the first practical airplane is now part of wright-patterson air force base, home to the air force research laboratory dedicated to advancing aerospace technologies. that's why i'm here to combine the efforts of the wright image group who are preparing to
construct a new monument for america to promote our nation's accomplishments in air and space, calling it the triumph of flight seen here, they will place a massive replica 250 feet in the air above the crossroads intersections of interstate 70 and 5. madam speaker this monument's innovative design will remind us of the wright brothers' achievement and excite and inspire future generations. it will honor ohio's aviation leaders, including the bright brothers -- wright brothers, john glenn, and neil armstrong. i congratulate them and look forward to this monument. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. treasury secretary jack lew has been urging congress to act
before friday's debt ceiling deadline. mr. honda: but here we are again with no signs of progress. the treasury department's once again being forced to resort to extraordinary measures to continue financing the government. these games of chicken are dangerous, they're eirresponsible, led to turmoil in the markets and cost our economy billions. we've avoided disaster in the past and i believe we'll avoid it this time. in any game of chicken, one side always must blink. but what happens when neither side blinks? disaster. i ask my colleagues to help me install a permanent fix to end the brinksmanship surrounding the debt limit my h.r. 2333 toy allows the debt limit to be raised unless a supermajority of congress votes to block such action. this would shift the role of congress to disapproving debt ceiling increases instead of approving them. my approach has been approved by
several senators and is endorsed by a growing chorus of economists and outside thought leaders. i urge my colleagues to join me in preserving the permanent, necessary reforms. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. phillip seymour hoffman a talented actor, didn't have to die. heroin use has doubled with one million e.r. visits around many deaths of overdose. this is a public health issue because addiction is a mental health disease. mr. murphy: peer support is only support, it is not the whole treatment. in "time" magazine a parent whose donson died of drug overdose said, i did everything i could, but i failed him.
that included eight residential treatment programs and four outpatient programs but those programs don't always do everything right. 90% of those who enter those treatments don't receive evidence-based treatment. i encourage my colleagues to join me in sponsoring the helping families in mental health crisis act, h.r. 3317. let's get people the help they need. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. from 194 to 1949, the african-american marines that trained at monfort camp, north carolina, fought intolerance and segregation, yet they continued to serve their nation proudly. i'm honored to have one of these men, world war ii veteran corporal g. robert smith, amongst the ranks of constituents in ohio's second district. mr. wenstrup: i'm grateful for
his service and dedication to our nation and would like tufere my sincere congratulations for being recognized with a congressional gold medal. corporal smith lives up to the high standards that characterize the united states marine corps. the statement, once a marine always a marine is ea minder that these standard carry on long after the uniform has been put away. fellow americans take pride in your military service and your contributions to your community after that service. the freedom and liberty that we enjoy today is due in large part to the sacrifices made by individuals like corporal g. robert smith. corporal smith, semper fi. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? . >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. this week marks the 71st anniversary of a dramatic sacrifice made by four u.s.
army chaplains during world war ii on february 3, 1943. on that day the u.s.s. dorchester was torpedoed by a german submarine and sunk. four u.s. army chaplains, one rabbi, one roman catholic priest, one baptist minister, the baptist was born in columbus, ohio, came together on that day on the dorchester as the dorchester began sinking, they began to calm the men and organized an orderly evacuation but it quickly became clear there weren't off life jackets. n a true display of hero ismism they took off their -- heroism, they took off their life jackets, they linked arms and sang hymns as the ship went down. mr. stivers: i'd like to thank the wilmington, ohio, american legion post and other legion
posts and v.f.w. posts that helped tell this story this week. we must never forget. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, americans want us to work together to help our economy grow, to support job creation and create an opportunity for every american to succeed. mr. yoder: our government stiffles innovation and hinders job creation. the construction of the keystone pipeline means thousands of jobs to americans who are looking to get back to work. it means energy, construction, transportation jobs but our own government continues to stand in the way. the congressional budget office now says the administration's health care mandate will lead to as many as 2.3 million american workers losing their jobs because of what this government has decided to do to them. these are real consequences for
real families. our economy isn't struggling because of the efforts of the american people. no. our economy struggles because of bloated, expensive and destructive bureaucracy that stands in the doorway of progress. mr. speaker, as this government grows, opportunity shrinks. it's time that this government removes the weight of this government off the backs of the american people. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. bishop: mr. speaker, by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 472 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 83, house resolution 472. resolved, that at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 2954, to authorize escambia county, florida, to
convey certain property that was formerly part of santa rosa island national monument and that was conveyed to escambia county subject to restrictions on use and reconveyance. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 113-35. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution.
each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. any member may demand a separate vote in the house on any amendment adopted in the committee of the whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2.
at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 3964, to address certain water-related concerns in the sacramento-san joaquin alley, and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 113-34. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read.
all points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. any member may demand a separate vote in the house on any amendment adopted in the committee of the whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text.
the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or ithout instructions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for one hour. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, for the purpose of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for purpose of debate only. i ask that all members may have five legislative days to revise . d extend their remarks the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. bishop: the resolution provides a structured rule for consideration of two separate bills. h.r. 2954, which is the public access and lands improvement ct, and h.r. 3964, the sacramento-san joaquin valley emergency water delivery act. provides an hour of general debate, each controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the committee on natural resources. the rule makes in order five amendments to h.r. 2954 and ight to h.r. 3964 and of those amendments made in order, nine are democrats amendments. this provides for an open debate on the merits of the important pieces of legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman, my friend from utah, mr. bishop, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, we have real problems facing our nation. the measures before us today are partisan and have no chance of becoming law. my friends across the aisle would rather pick political battles than propose real solutions. we work together on the farm
bill, the budget and the omnibus appropriations bill, and i hope that soon we will water resources development conference report. instead of considering in a bipartisan manner, however, we are here once again considering a participate san bill that will not become law. san francisco, h.r. 3964 is a far-reaching measure of drastic and immediate consequences for its chosen winners. yet, the bill was sprow deuced only a week -- introduced only a week ago and with only republican co-sponsors. california is in the middle of a terrible drought. some californians are already reporting that no water comes out when they turn on their taps. they need a real solution. we've got our water issues in
florida. there's not enough of it in places that need, and too much of it where it is not needed. yet, my friends across the aisle have decided to hand pick when states' rights don't matter and take the opportunity to blast california's prerogative. california has a plan. the bay delta conservation plan at's been worked on in a unanimously important way. instead, this legislation has turned a legitimate crisis into a justification for a power grab prioritizing junior water rights holders over those with senior rights. i respect my colleagues from california, but the governor is responsible for the entire state, and he expressly rejects the measure before us today. mr. speaker, californians already have, as i've said, a
water use plan in place. the plan is the result of long detailed discussions and carefully crafted policy. yet, this bill would substitute, indeed preempt the will of the people with a reactionary federal policy. specifically, the bill preempts california law, eliminates endangered species act protections for salmon and other fisheries, overturns existing federal law as well as undermines existing agreements and court orders related to water use in california. moreover, this bill will not fix the problem which is simple. there is not enough water. h.r. 36 -- 3964 will not end the drought. it will not create more water. simply put, it will only decide who will go thirsty.
california's secretary for natural resources, john laird, wrote to the relevant committees, the bill -- and i quote him -- falsely holds the promise of water relief that cannot be delivered because in this drought the water simply does not exist, end of quote. how and when to direct water is very similar to problems we face in the everglades. without an ongoing flush of water into the ocean, saltwater, sea water intrudes upon the delta. you then wind up with salt -- saltwater inland and then you might as well not have any water at all. i didn't have to deliberate long to decide against this bill. bill nia, the state the supposedly helps is strongly opposed to it, and let me be very clear. that means the governor and
those who are critical to it -- i understand there are members of the california delegation that do support this matter, and i respect that. i can't say it any better than myself. the only way we're going to help california is to realize you can't play politics with the person's drinking water. turning now to the other piece of legislation, h.r. 2954, is no better either substantively or procedurally. my friends across the aisle continue to play fast and loose with their pledge to address one issue at a time. that's what they said. .r. 2954 is 10 unrelated bills stitched together. some of the provisions we're looking at today are not controversy, but rather than -- noncontroversial, but rather than pass them through other less contentious means, my friends have packaged them together with partisan measures for rank political purposes.
it's fraken stein's parliamentary monster. the other day at the rules committee, my friends across the aisle talked about how they loved national parks and shared their experiences hiking and visiting the parks with their family. yet, they are still bringing h.r. 2954 so the floor, a bill that would greatly hamstring the national park service bureau of land management and the united states forest service in their capabilities to protect public land and ndangered species. these bills are designed to influence or dictate management decisions about the conveyance or disposal of federal lands. they tie the hands of public lanched managers and give away manages of dollars worth of federal rand to local government without ensuring the land is used in the public's best interest. they include drastic changes to regulations related to grazing policy and waive orundermine
existing environmental laws. some of these provisions would be significantlyless controversial were it not for the unnecessary provisions waiving environmental protection. it's no secret my friends across the aisle look to undermine if not eliminate, the national environmental policy act at every chance that they can obtain. these are the kinds of policies that leave 300,000 west virginians without water to drink or bathe. we don't know the effects of the chemicals that spill into the drinking water for 300,000 west virginians. we don't know yet how much or even specifically what will spill. the lasting damage to west virginia's water supply can't be predicted. that is why it should be an exemplar for taos carefully have environmental regulations everywhere.
mr. speaker, week after week, my republican colleagues continue to bring up partisan bills that offer no relief to hardworking americans. i believe that this institution is better than that and must change course. not tounded that we have authorized unemployment insurance. let me repeat that. i am astounded that we have not re-authorized unemployment insurance for now what is 1.6 million americans. with each passing day, more families face the threat of losing their homes. with each passing day, our roads, our bridges, our schools, our parks, our ports, our airports and railways continue to degrade, due to lack of adequate investment. and with each passing day, americans burdened by long-term unemployment see little, if no
action in the house of representatives to give them hope. with so many americans and their families enduring difficult times, we cannot afford to wait any longer. americans deserve peace of mind and a government that functions. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: my good friend from florida was correct in at least one aspect. there are two bills involved in this particular rule. one which involved 10 different sections dealing with land issues that are critical to 10 states, chagrined they have to come to congress for redressing their grievance. the other one deals with water issues and to explain that water issues i wish to yield five minutes to the gentleman from california who is the sponsor of that particular bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. speaker, as a farmer in the central sal lee, i grew up there born and raised, on my own personal farm with my family and we have struggled with this water fight for years
even before i was born. this isn't a new issue. it's something that's been talked about for years. the problem is, we've talked about it long enough. we've got to do something, we've got to make a difference for these people. we've got people in our district, when they talk about unemployment benefits, these people would rather have a job. tush on that water, they'll be back to work. we've got farmers in my district who are literally laying people off today, putting more people in unemployment lines because of environmental regulations. yes, there is a drought going on. that's been going on. it's happened in the past. we've got at least 10 in our recorded history in california. but when you look at what our forefathers have done, they created an infrastructure to allow taos prepare for those droughts and what those regulations have done is allow water to go out into the ocean and not be in place to prevent this disastrous situation we face today. that's what we're fighting over today wevpl want to make sure that infrastructure is used and our taxpayer money is used or put in place so when those projects are there, we have watt they are to the supply our farm, supply our communities.
over the last year, as a member of congress, and the two years before that as a member of the state house and before that as a farmer, i've dealt with and talked with my locals, especially my local elected, my city councils, city managers, board of supervisors, all come to me with the same issue. what are we going to do? we've got 40% water for this city, we've got 20% of the water for our farmers. how are we going to take care of our communities, how are we going to allow them to be successful. this is one of the solutions. mr. valadao: when we talk about solutions i'm fine and happy to work with members on the bay delta conservation plan. i'm fine talking about the water bond as long as it delivers water infrastructure for our valley. we have to make sure the crisis we're facing today is addressed because it is a crisis, it is affecting people today. we are seeing people being laid off. yes that is putting a huge dent in our resources because we have
to pay these people because they're not working because of a program, because of regulation that were put in place to allow that water to go out into the ocean for no good reason. this has had an impact on my district. we're going to continue to fight, and yes this is ea solution. if the other side has a solution to bring to the table and be part of the conversation, i'm happy to hear and it happy to negotiate. until then we're going to continue to fight on our side and push this forward i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from california, former member of the rules committee, ms. matsui. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. matsui: thank you, mr. speaker. i wish to thank the gentleman from florida for yielding me time. mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 3964. california's currently experiencing a record drought. up until just last thursday, it had been 54 days without rain in
my district of sacramento. that's almost two months. to put this in context, sacramento is experiencing 130-year record for low rainfall. a record that dates back to 1884. with 2013 being the driest year on record since the gold rush, and 2014 being the third year of a drought cycle, we're being pushed to make do with less water than ever before. a statewide drought emergency has been declared and my district of sacramento is doing its part by instituting a mandatory reduction in water use. my constituents are required by law now to reduce their water use 20% to 30%. fine for multiple offenders will reach $1,000. moreover in the sacramento region, the fulsomeres. vaw is at dangerously -- the full --
the folsom reservoir is at dangerously low levels. unfortunately, there's no silver bullet to address these issues. the issue of water in california has been debated for so many decades because it is a critical issue for the state. as the daughter of a central valley farmer, who grew up on a farm, i deeply understand the value of and the controversy over water. in northern california, we've done our best to balance our watershed to provide water for our farms, our cities, and habitats. to say this bill will help the drought is grossly misleading and frankly, irresponsible. mr. speaker, even if we pumped as much water south as possible, it still wouldn't be enough. the problem is a lack of rain. there is simply no more water to pump from the delta. mr. speaker, instead of working
together, bill further divides our state. my district, the city of sacramento, the sacramento region -- region, and northern california as a whole strongly opposes this bill. some of the concerns include the loss of the state's right to manage its own water, the decimation of environmental protections for sacramento's san joaquin dell tark the ability to manage folsom vezzvaw for the benefit of the --res. vaw for the benefit -- reservoir for the area. we can not afford to give up california's right to control its own water future. the stakes are much too high. i urge my colleagues to strongly oppose this legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: reserves. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from florida.
mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i'm pleased at this time to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from california, a member of the energy and commerce committee, mr. mcnerney the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize for two minutes. mr. mcnerney: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i'm opposed to h.r. 3964 for a variety of reasons but primarily because it does nothing to raise california's drought. i'd like to raise two points about the bill's process and debate. i offered an amendment to subset provisions of this bill in the 2015 water year. i did this because the bill's authors stated the bill is intended to be a short-term measure. and yet my amendment to limit the duration of the bill was prevented from coming to the floor for debate. i offered another amendment which was actually proposed by the bill's authors, a few weeks ago, the speaker, the majority whip, and the bill's authors held a press conference in california where they bemoaned
the fact that the senate would not come to the negotiating table to address long-term water shortage issues. i agree with them that a bipartisan discussion in both houses of congress is appropriate. and that's why i offered an amendment using their own suggestions to establish a joint select committee to address drought issues in the west that would be comprised of 10 members just as the bill's author recommended and would work out a comprehensive solution. that proposal, too, was rejected as was a similar amendment by my california valley colleague mr. cost tasm we wanted to bring the house -- mr. costa. we wanted to bring the bill to the table but are being denid tools we need to do just that. how can the bill's authors claim they want a bicameral discussion yet deny a vote on this issue, one which they just advocated for. i'm trying to establish a set of
guideline which the bill's authors say they want but won't allow. i yield pack. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: i appreciate the gentleman's frustration. those very proposals were offered by chairman lucas in the farm bill and rejected by the senate. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from california with whom i served previously on the intelligence committee and is a member of the energy and resources -- commerce committee, ms. eshoo. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. eshoo: i thank the speaker and rise in fierce opposition to the bill being considered because it throws decades of state and federal water law out the window and in the process it would kill thousands of jobs in the bay area and elsewhere on the west coast and it pits water users one against the other. salmon fishing is one of
california's oldest industries. today, the bay delta salmon fishery is not nearly as healthy as it once was but it still supports thousands of jobs up and down the entire west coast. this bill would dry up what's left of the once-legendary salmon fishery industry. here are some of the laws that this bill would cut or override. i think everyone should fasten their intealts. the california constitution, the reclamation act of 190 to, the central valley project improvement act. the state and federal endangered species act. the national environmental policy act, the san joaquin river settlement act and the wild and scenic river act protections for the merced river. if that's not enough for everyone in this house to know then really there isn't anything else to know. vote against this bill.
it's horrible. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from alifornia, a member of the commerce -- the natural , mr. -- -- mittee mr. huffman. mr. huffman: last time california hadded this kind of drought, we came together, i was fortunate to serve in the state legislature to work on that. national newspapers called it the biggest thing california had done for water in years. this bill repeals it.
the bay delta conservation plan which my friend referenced is over if this bill passes because the premise of that plan are co-equal goalers in environment and water supply reliability and when you preempt and repeal that there's no basis for that plan to move forward at all. you better include some funding for the federal courts if this bill passes because instead of a solution, you're going to be unleashing a wave of litigation unlike anything the state of california has ever seen. it's going to hurt the san joaquin valley and every other part of the state that needs constructive solutions not a new water war. we have deference to state of california and all other states in administering our water system. that was made clear by chief justice rehnquist. the principle under the public trust doctrine as part of the
california constitution and the california supreme court has made it clear that that is a bedrock of california water law. the california legislature in hat 2009 package called that a fundamental principle and it is repealed by this overreach of federal authority that was offered today as a solution. i know some people across the aisle like to talk about the 10th amendment and rail against expansion of federal authority and federal overreach. well, we are living in a very glass house here today, mr. chairman. because this is the most overreaching expansion that i can ever imagine on something as basic as water rights in the western united states. . mr. bishop: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield one minute to the distinguished the gentleman from california, mr. miller, member of the education
and work force committee and former chair. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. miller: i thank my colleagues who have spoken out against this legislation. this legislation is in no way a solution to the problems that we have in california with the continuing drought. this legislation is simply a legislative temper tantrum. they don't want to nuance what has to be nuance. they don't want to balance urban, rural, agriculture, technology. this is what the governor is having to do and the resource agencies having to do and the entire state legislature is trying to figure out how all of california survives the drought. this one says, we'll kick over the barn upstate there and take their water and we'll be ok. well, why doesn't san diego look up north and say we'll kick over the barn and take their water
and we'll be ok. this is the greatest intrusion into state's water rights that we have seen in this legislature and that's why governors of other western states understand the principles that are engaged here are an absolute attack on their states also. and that's why representatives from those states oppose this legislation last time it was presented and they oppose it again this time. so you have a bipartisan coalition in the states trying to work this out from every economic sector, from every environmental sector for the benefit of the state of california. this drought doesn't have to end in this rainy season. it can go on another year and another year. this legislation is destructive, destructive of our trying to of sure that every facet the california society survives and that's why this bill should be rejected. assault onnd it's an
states' rights. they joined the governor of california in opposition of this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: reserves. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: the senate has adopted flood insurance reform, but unfortunately it was denied and as incon grewous as it might be, we consider it an important issue while we are talking about drought to bring up this measure having to do with flood insurance. it's an important issue for families across the nation. so today we will provide that opportunity again. if we defeat the previous question i'm going to offer an amendment to this rule that would delay insurance premium hikes and provide financial
relief to thousands of american families and specifically families in florida. to discuss our proposal, i yield one minute to the gentleman from nevada, my good friend, mr. horsford. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. horsford: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question and vote on addressing the nation's concern on flood insurance and come up with a comprehensive water plan to address our drought. last month the senate voted to approve the homeowner flood flurns affordability act. house g.o.p. blocks vote on flood insurance bill. florida governor urges speaker boehner to take it up by "the palm beach post." this bipartisan legislation
provides a four-year time-out on rate increase hes by a flood map update for a property. the bill creates ar flood insurance advocate to investigate homeowner complaints. during a recent trip to my home state in nevada, my constituents told me that these increases can be excessive and unfair. it's a problem they want to address now. and i urge my colleagues to vote no and to allow us to bring up this previous question and offer an alternative. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: i would like to recognize five minutes to the gentleman from california to talk about how the first bill deals with water diversions, not water consumption. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. >> i thank the chairman for allowing me to speak on this important bill.
mr. nunes: today we are going to hear a lot of falsehoods but why are we hearing those falsehoods? because for 40 years, people have made a career of using water as a weapon. why? because they never liked the fact that farmers and farmworkers were making what was once a dry area of the state the garden of eden of this world. they never liked that. why? because they don't want to have admit to themselves when they live in their beautiful cities of hollywood and san francisco and these great cities on the coast of california, beautiful areas. it's a desert. they don't have any water either. they wanted to keep our area where i grew up, wanted to keep it as a desert because they feel bad about the destruction they have done on the coast of california. so if they can keep inland
california in its original state, they would be happy. but for the farmers and farmworkers that are losing their farms, farmworkers out of jobs, we are going to lose 30,000 jobs this year, it's an inconvenient truth that for 40 years, this body has been preempting state law and taking water away from one region and dumping it and wasting it out to the ocean. ou started with the endangered species act. 1992, a lot of talk about how we are gutting the central valley improvement act, that bill was a state preemption. we have no way to fix the problems in california because of all the state preemptions that have been done by the left in this body over four decades. so i found it fascinating that members of congress were getting up to speak about how we're going to kill the fish and this
water is so important for these fish and the little delta smelt, we have to keep them and keep the habitat, well, there's little more truth to that, mr. speaker. let me tell you what they're really hiding, and i apologize for the viewers at home, this is what they're hiding, sewer discharge into the delta killing their precious little fish. every one of the cities in the san francisco bay, sacramento, e delta, sewerage runs right into the waterway and kills the little fish. pretty startling, isn't it? they don't talk about that, do they? the other little thing they don't talk about is where does their water come from, because they live in a desert, too. you visit san francisco, silicon valley, people think that's a beautiful area, green lawns,
people water their lawns, they don't have any water, mr. speaker, either, because conveniently, this body preempted state law, took water from our area and the sierra nevadas which is about 200 miles away, but worse than that, they went into a national park to take the water. what national park? yosemite national park. they went to yosemite, one of the treasures of our national park system, and they took this valley and they put a dam so they could create this lake. look, i want the people of san francisco and the bay area to have water, i don't want them to be like our communities without any water, but we have to tell the truth. they dammed up this valley to create this water and doesn't
protect their little fish that they want to protect so much, mr. speaker. it gets piped over to san francisco. here's the pipe. they catch the water and pipe it all over the bay area, silicon valley, san francisco, discharge their sewer into the bay, take pristine water from our area to feed their families and grow their grass. i don't see of them up here saying they are going to tear down this system, dump this ater into the bay to protect their little stupid fish, their little delta smelt. they don't want to tell the truth. this isn't about truth telling, but about money and power. millions of dollars -- can i ask
for one additional minute. so all of the radical environmental groups that were created in this country started, where? until hollywood and san francisco and west coast of california. lawsuits, lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. millions of dollars went to trial lawyers, but you know what, mr. speaker? those millions of dollars that came from my community to pay off these rich lawyers, we don't know how many millions it was because it's hidden from the taxpayer, hidden by the american people, sealed by court order. why don't they come out and tell us how much money they made. millionaires off of government. used the government to make millions. use the government to dump sewer into the water to kill the fish. dam up yosemite, to bring the water from yosemite while our
people, farmers and farmworkers lose their jobs. it's an inconvenient truth, mr. speaker. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield one minute to the distinguished the gentleman from connecticut, mr. courtney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from connecticut is recognized. mr. courtney: anyone watching this debate i think understands why the american public is so turned off by this congress. this is a bill that was brought to the floor in a hyper partisan process, bypassing the committee and it's going absolutely no where. in the meantime we have an economy which needs this congress to act. a few days ago, the senate did act on a bipartisan basis to pass the homeowner insurance affordability act which will help coastal properties that are locking up because of skyrocketing insurance premiums which the senate bill will fix. 182 co-sponsors in the house,
bipartisan, support of the bankers association, housing advocates, broad bipartisan support. it will help the real estate market and drive this recovery in a positive direction. amend the rule. let's bring up the flood insurance relief program and put this underlying bill back to committee where it be longs where these issues can be worked out by both sides of the aisle and both sides of the state of california. >> i yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds. mr. courtney: pass this flood insurance measure. if you talk to the realtors and bankers, these properties are locking up because of the flood insurance premiums. we can change that today and get this bill to the president and get this recovery moving and let's listen to the american people who want to see bipartisan action that are focused on getting a strong
economic recovery. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: if the speaker would forgive me for getting back to the subject matter, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from california to talk about the water bill. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. he opposition has erupted into a veritable mount vesuvius on the water bill in california this doesn't preempt state water rights, it invehicles and protects state water rights against any bureaucracy, local, state or federal. mr. mcclintock: this is a constitutional duty of the federal government and made essential by the unique relationship between the federal and state governments with respect to california water policy, the mixture of the central valley project and the
state water project. to thery dick queue louse comment that this is a theft of northern california water and that northern california is united in its opposition, nothing could be further from the truth. on the contrary this bill protects the nort from any attempt to override established california water rights law in reallocating water from the north. and just to illustrate this, i would point out that it was these provisions in the last session of congress that the northern california association of water agencies specifically pointed to in support, they said this. the bill, if enacted, now contain pross visions to protect the interest of senior water rights holders in the sacramento valley but would provide significant material water policy improvements to current federal law. the bill if enacted would provide unprecedented statutory express recognition of and
commitment to california's state water rights priority system and area of origin protections. finally to the argument that we cannot make it rain, there's not enough water to go around. that's true. one of the reasons is because in this third year of drought, we have dumped a toal of 1.6 million acre-feet of water into the pacific ocean that was desperately needed to support the threatened human population of california. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida. thank you very much. mr. speaker, i am pleased at this time to yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. good friend, mr. langevin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. langevin: i thank the gentleman for yielding, mr.
speaker, i rise to urge a no vote on the previous question so we may immediately consider h.r. 3370, the homeowner flood insurance affordability act. mr. speaker, communities in my home state simply cannot wait for relief from steep flood insurance rate increases. rhode island family sls told me they are facing flood insurance rates upwards of $35,000 and they're scared of losing their homes. if these rates go into effect in many cases, families will be paying more for flood insurance than they are for their mortgage. unless we act, it potentially could see whole neighborhoods, middle class neighborhoods, wiped out because they -- not because of a flood but because they're drowning under the weight of the debt of the cost of flood insurance. this is unconscionable. implementing a delay in rate increases, mr. speaker, will give fema time to complete an affordability study and develop recommendations to help homeowners afford premiums. without it, thousands of middle class homeowners will continue to suffer from the uncertainty
of not knowing whether the cost of sfloodnurns -- flood insurance will make home ownership unaffordable. the senate passed the legislation on thursday with a strong bipartisan vote. the house companion bill has 182 bipartisan co-sponsors. i urge my colleagues to support consideration of the homeowner insurance affordability act and provided me relief for families in our community. i thank the gentleman and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, would you be kind enough to tell both sides how much time remains. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has seven minute the gentleman from utah has 17 3/4 minutes remaining. the speaker pro tempore: the -- mr. hastings: thank you, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from california, the ranking member of the committee on financial services and i wish to
make clear to my friend on the other side that continues to say that he wants to bring us back to the subject matter of this underlying bill that the minority has been granted a motion to recommit. and that motion to recommit is just as relevant as the underlying bill. to speak to this issue then, i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. waters: i thank the gentleman for allowing me to take some time on the floor to plead with my colleagues on the on sid side of the aisle to join with us, to support our middle class citizens who now have their homes at risk, i plead with the opposite side of the aisle to join with what is a bipartisan piece of legislation, a bicameral piece of legislation, legislation that
was passed out by the senate that would correct the unintended consequences of the biggert-waters act. why am i so passionate about this? first of all, i was a co-author of the biggert-waters act. it was a bill that we got together on, we tried to reduce the debt that we are confronted with. providing assistance in subsidies to our homeowners. many of our homeowners, as you know, across this country, are put at risk, their homes are destroyed through natural disasters, we have to be available to them through this kind of insurance program. the national flood insurance program. and so, we have the senate, we have republicans, we have democrats who have all joined in th us to do something very simple. delay this for a time period. delay this for four years so we can get on fema and fema can get it right.
femas med up the biggert-waters bill. we said, you have to do an affordability -- affordability study. they did not do that we said, you have to get your mapping and remapping right, they have not done that. we said get a credible database, they have not done that. we have got to correct fema. there's no reason why people should be having their premiums increase by 500%. this is wrong, we can do something about it, don't stand in the way of coming to the assistance of the american citizens who depend on us in their time of trouble. mr. speaker, members, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: may i inquire of my friend how many more speakers he has on whatever topic he chooses? mr. hastings: two, i believe, and then myself to close. mr. bishop: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from florida, mr.
garcia, who is a dear personal friend of mine and he and i share concerns about florida's issues as well as this nation as it pertains to flood insurance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. garcia: thank you, i'd like to thank my colleague from florida for yielding and i want to echo the words of the previous speaker. like the gentleman, i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question so that we can take up a more important vote, so we can take up a strongly bipartisan, homeowners' flood insurance affordability act. during this congress, we have spent far, far too much time on issues that divide us. rather than on bipartisan issues that unite us. the homeowners' flood insurance affordability act is just that kind of bipartisan legislation that should be at the top of the house's agenda i would -- it would relieve homeowners of crushing premium rates that
strengthen our housing market and support economic recovery. that's why this legislation has such strong bipartisan support. the senate passed this bill by a 67-32 margin. the house companion bill has 182 co-sponsors including 56 republicans. mr. speaker, if the gentleman will yield a little more time. mr. hastings: 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. garcia: this is not right. i ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing that by voting to take up the homeowners' flood insurance affordability act, it just can't wait. it's time to make a diffs. nor reason, i urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so we can take up this bipartisan legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i yield 30 seconds to my good friend from texas, mr. green. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman from texas is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. green: thank you very much, i will be brief, mr. speaker. there is a great concern in the -- there is great concern in the real estate community. it is difficult to acquire flood insurance at some of the prices being quoted. i think it's exceedingly important we adhere to the words of ranking member waters, what's the rush? why not get the study? why not do that which we intended to do before we arrived at this position in our history? my hope is we will heed our herds. -- her words. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah. the gentleman reserves. the quelt from florida. mr. hastings: i adrise the gentleman from utah, i'm the last speaker i'm prepared to close if he's prepared to close. he's probably delighted i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: i'm surprised my friends across the aisle don't recognize the irony inform bringing these bills to the floor heat same time the california water bill is an
acknowledgment of how important clean water is while the public lands bill undermines our ability to keep that water clean. it would be funny fit weren't absolutely the truth of the matter. finally mechanic, meteorologists are calling the high pressure zone at the root of the drought in california the ridiculously resilient ridge. in that spirit, one could say that republicans resistance to extending unemployment insurance, fixing our aging infrastructure, raising the debt ceiling, fixing flood insurance and passing comprehensive immigration reform is also a resilience worthy of the same adverb. i believe that it is time for congress to get serious about moving our country forward. the motion to recommit is particularly relevant to all of us in this nation as it pertains to flood insurance and this
underlying bill as ms. eshoo said earlier is horrible. i ask unanimous consent, mr. eaker, to insert the extraneous material in the record immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. i urge my colleagues to vote no and defeat the previous question. i urge a no vote on the rule and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from utah. mr. bishop: thank you, mr. speaker. i have appreciated the tone and the tenor of today's discussion, and all the words that have been said on all the bills before us. we have had -- we have the opportunity of making the desert bloom, if we do things in the appropriate way. we have done it in the past, we can do it in the future. i recognize that most of the debate has been on the one bill in this particular issue which deals with the concept of -- the that deals with the
issue of water in california. totally ignored was the oother issue that is equally significant, especially to the 10 states that have an interest in that dealing with land policy. there is a role for government. if government is efficient and effective and compassionate and uses common sense. as i have worked with individuals bolt on the ground from the forest service and the b.l.m., who live in the communities and know those people, they are usually fair, efficient, and effective people. they get it. but the further they ascend on a remove from the people and go up into the hierarchy of the administration is they tend toward washington, d.c. it tends to forget people and the importance of helping people and they become ham strung as agencies with a blind obedience to policy and to regulation. so that the agencies become inefficient and ineffective and they lack compassion and they
are certainly devoid of commonsense. for example, we have one of the titles here that deals with islands off the coast of florida. in 1946, given to those counties, but they were told that they could not sell the land, they can only lease it, which means that homeowners, businesses on this island that have been federal property can now pay no property tax that helps the entire community to defend not only those areas but also keep the public lands open. it is an unfair situation. now think of this. this is property the federal government does not own, they do not need, they do not use and yet they still control by policy what they are doing on that land, which i'm sorry, is a silly spoil that simply hurts the people. we have the same thing across the country in alaska. in anchorage. three acres, three measly acres in the middle of the city. 5 city surrounded by federal lands. and you have to come to congress because the rules and policy of the administration, the
agencies, hurt people and lack commonsense by denying anchorage the ability to use that land as they wish. once again, land the federal government does not own, don't need, don't use but they still control what the local government can do with that particular piece of property. in nevada, they are willing to pay the government just to leave them alone. all the land they want is within the city boundaries of fernley. once again in this case the federal government does not need this property they don't use this property, they simply insist on controlling it and what we need to do is simply get them out of the way so we can help the community move forward. it seems it seems that will we have a gridlock and have a highly centralized bureaucracy. if congress has to be involved in moving three acres in the middle of one community, that is
a terrible situation. i recently read a book that dealt with my church members germanyn communist east and had difficult time in trying to find a place to build chapels. if they found an area, they had to find equivalent private property to give to the state because the state government in east germany insisted there was no net loss of property by the state. what i find amazing we in america with these land agencies have that exact same philosophy. there can be no net loss of property to the government. that means either we are wrong today or communist east germany was cregget back then and i really don't think it's the latter. another piece of property in new jersey. 2007, government came up with a management plan. agreed to by the community. they did a biological survey and found out that this plan does nothing to impede or harm any of the species available at cape
hatteras. next year, there was a loss. the land agency caved in a sue and settle settlement which harmed the people in that area and hurt those people who are making their livelihood. yes, in this case, the federal government owns the property and uses the property, but their control of the property is a total lack of common sense and total lack of compassion and hurts the people who live there. during the clinton administration, we identified or the clinton administration identified land under federal government control that was not needed that was useless. however, trying to find what those landsr requires you to go to 150 different sites to look in 150 different books. why would they not put that on a computerized system some anyone
can have access to it and there is transparency to what we have and do not have. the agency said even though that is a good idea, they are too busy to accomplish that task. in a response that makes the rollout of obamacare look well managed. why do we need to understand where these lands are? forest service had land in one of my communities that they owned for 40 years and did not know they actually had and when the community wanted to do a cemetery and did a title search, we found out it was a forest service land. even though the locals wanted to transfer this land and hadn't used it in decades, it took four years to get this congress to authorize and the forest service charged the community six grand to transfer the paperwork over. we had b.l.m. land they don't need or use and still trying to get them to transfer the land
over to the state utah to build needed infrastructure on a national guard base that is still owned technically by the b.l.m. that's why we need to understand what this is. we have a simple system that we have bureaucratic lethargy. we have a historical site in washington that was historic before wilderness was created in that particular area and to shore up that lookout so it wouldn't collapse and some judge back on the west coast decided you have to send helicopters in there to tear it down because you couldn't make those kinds of improvements on a piece of property that is revered by that community and the environmental community use it as a hiking trail but we have to make that decision by this summer to save that historic site. in yosemite national park, in
california, a horrific fire that destroyed both public and private land. we know look at the fact that most of the private lands are now 60% recovered. they have gone through the takeout the dead wood and timber. but on the public side of that land, we are still going through an evaluation process that even under an expedited system simply means that it won't be until late summer before they can actually finish that and then the lawsuits get to start. if you don't remove that dead timber, that burned timber within a year, it is useless and all it does is become infested and becomes source and fuel for a future fire in a state that is in their third year of drought and needs the water for other things other than fighting a fire. these bills in this section of land try and solve these problems so we finally force the agencies to do that which helps
people, instead of hindering peoples' processes. we find a situation where the agencies today of our government are inefficient and they are ineffective and they lack compassion, that actually hurts people and they do not have common sense and that's why this package is so important and it is important to do it now, to help people. it is simply sad that we are in a situation where congress has to push the agencies to do the right thing. it should be better than that. we can do better than that, and that's what these bills attempt to do. mr. speaker, in closing, i want to reiterate this rule is fair and appropriate and as appropriate and as fair as the underlying measures presented in this rule. with that, i yield back and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the
ayes have it. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time of any electronic vote. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.]